Slashdot Mirror
NPR Finds XM's Achilles Heel
PreacherTom writes "In the ongoing radio wars, one only has to listen to 20 seconds of Howard Stern's language to know that the lack of regulation gives satellite radio a distinct advantage. Of all the challengers, it seems that NPR has finally found a weakness in XM, which supplements its satellite coverage with earth-bound transmitters. A recent test found that 19 of these transmitters were unlicensed and another 221 exceeded their authorized power level, giving NPR an opening to press with an apparently sympathetic FCC. It certainly doesn't help that XM's own filings support their case."
XM is cool -- I tried it out for a few months and actually found myself listening to the radio for the first time in a long time. That ended when the lady of the house gave me her old iPod, which is now my primary listening device. I download a ton of independent music, go to a lot of shows, and also produce a few bands so I get demos all the time. A few podcasts make their way to the little device, and I'm happier for it. I'm 32, but it seems that most teenagers don't even know what a radio is, except for 88.7 FM or whatever station their FM transmitter for their iPod uses.
I think radio technology is old and dated, and I can't really see a future for it. I've been calling for the FCC to deregulate (or lessen regulations) on the old analog TV channels -- and it looks like others have too because the FCC is doing just that. Setting up large chunks of bandwidth for broadcasting is ridiculous, it would be like setting up large chunks of the Internet for one-way non-interactive websites. The future is about a la carte selections, narrowcasting, custom playlists, whatever. The future is not massive 50,000 watt transmitters hitting the numb masses, but about individuals selecting what they want.
I think the future is either WiFi-based communications, or EDGE-network communications. I already stream my music from my home server to my PDA via EDGE (HP PDA with Bluetooth dialup to my cell phone). It works great and I have instant access to gigs of music (and limited video).
I realize that I am in the minority here, but everyone who checks out my system loves it and asks how they can do it. For now, they can't do it easily, but I don't expect that to last as more cell phone companies embrace wireless access for the web. For now it will stay proprietary (t-zones, vCast, etc), but give it time and as more bandwidth is deregulated, more people will jump on the narrowcast system. I even download a podcast of a few bands that put an hour playlist together, and it is perfect for my drive. Interactive real-time broadcasts aren't that interesting to me.
The short future will be both local and satellite radio stations bashing each other over legal infractions, and that's fine -- let them spend their money on lawyers and lobbying Congress for more power over the airwaves. That future is only good for a little while, though. Right now people love the web over TV because they demand what they want, and someone supplies it RIGHT NOW. As the TV becomes more copyprotected, more people will demand more of the web, and suppliers will meet their needs.
As wireless connectivity reaches more of the masses, and becomes easier to use, and becomes faster, the days of broadcasting (TV, radio, newspaper, etc) will fall away, left as a memory to what the previous generation did. How antiquated. How cute.
Sidenote: Funny how radio can not compete in the same way as XM because of the FCC. The FCC was created to support big radio conglomerates and keep out little competitors. They're still using the FCC to keep their monopoly, without realizing they're leaking customers like a sieve.
If the signal is encrypted, and you have to PAY to receive and decrypt the signal, so what if it is filthy language? Who cares where the signal originates?
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
I have to pay for it and it still doesn't have anything worth listening too unless you care about sports or shock jocks.
Granted, it's not really XM's fault that 98.3% of all music created today is rehashed, overproduced, halfwit crap, but still, you can't beat an MP3 player and your own collection. When somebody starts up a radio station that lets me pick the songs I want to listen to, we'll see about it.
That means a driver listening to NPR might suddenly hear a blast of obscenities from Howard Stern
...found that 30% to 40% of the modulators exceeded FCC-mandated power levels
What is that might "frog with wings".
NPR LABS
So I'll have problems listening to FM 87.8? And why is public broadcasting using public funds to research FM modulators. I don't want donate to that research.
couldn't conclusively determine whether satellite radio devices or, say, unrelated MP3 players
Ahh, evil MP3s reminiscent of that napster doom and gloom.
If there is a problem, XM and Sirus will fix it. If not, you won't get sympathy from the public because your content is censored and people want to hear "free" (as in beer or something?) broadcast. Think of the Children - FUD only works with the uneducated.
This breach of rules for terrestrial radio stations surely infringes on my rights online.
burn them!
I could [censored] that he was on Sirius.
I'd sure like to see the FCC release a bunch of these frequencies back to the public. Didn't we already pay for them? Also, I am definately sure that most licensed broadcasters bend the rules a little, whether it is to up the signal power, or even to release noise into nearby bands. How can we get the FCC to audit their licensees? Are we not complaining loud enough?
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
(really, why now?)
Don't forget 50's betnik jazz...
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
well i wanted XM until i found out they didn't have NPR, and so i'd have to go to Sirius instead. but this makes me guess that there's some bad tension between XM and NPR, obviously... maybe XM wouldn't allow NPR to broadcast on their service?
I use Sirius all the time, and I can always find something worth listening to. I listen to FIND new things/people/groups to listen to, I don't have enough storage to tote all the MP3's I might want around, and I carry 10 DVD's worth of stuff now.
That, and finding DJ Tiesto at 3am in the middle of Alabama lets me make to the hotel in one piece.
It's just better radio. For people who spend too much time in the car, it's a bargain.
Radio is the single worst form of distribution of modern times. Between mouthy DJs, repetitive and annoying advertisement and frankly awful music, dragged out from some record label's production lines, I can't stand the radio. Personal opinion of course. All of the functions radio used to occupy have been replaced by better media. The music's always the latest offering from old news and it's repetitive. Same songs all the time. Digital radio is hardly any better. I prefer to just rip my mates' CD collections. A couple of mp3 discs and I'm happy for hours. If I really like an album I'll go out and buy it. I don't want to hear normal releases because they're never representative of the whole album. One or two singles playing over and over is enough to put me off the band/DJ forever! I used to like The Offspring, until Pretty Fly was overplayed.
There's no place like 127.0.0.1
The article says that NPR is filing a complaint with the FCC due to non-compliance by satellite radio broadcasters and devices. That's a perfectly reasonably thing to do. But both the article and Slashot summary imply that NPR has an axe to grind against Satellite radio. Is there some NPR -vs- satellite radio thing going on that I don't know about? It seems like that is pre-requisite knowledge for understanding this article.
It wasn't enough that they bored us to death with their crappy programming. Of course, you could never actually listen to their crappy programming, since it was all commercials, all the time. And you could never get the IQ85 disk jockies to shut up, either.
So, we voted with our wallets, and chose to pay for something decent instead of shoveling down the free crap they offered us. Now, they're mad, cause we don't want what their peddling. So what do they do when they're beaten in the market place? Sue, of course!
Unreal. Who bothers to listen to broadcast radio anymore? It's unlistenable.
"Man is nothing without the works of man" -- Helvetius
Yeah, pathetic that they do investigative reporting. Who listens to NPR for that? I want my "Delicious Dish."
Something tells me you didn't feel bad to begin with. So why are you listening to NPR, if they offend you so much?
Repetition does not transform a lie into the truth. - FDR
if XM uses a few frequncies that they shouldn't and the ones that they should the boost the power I don't see any harm in that
*Twitch* this brought to you by Mountain Dew *Twitch*
I mean really come on.
Don't you hate glorious self-promotion? Visit my Blog
Hey! I donated a good chunk of money this time around because of the bluegrass music they play. My local station (WAMU) plays bluegrass all day Sunday and I absolutely love it.
NPR stations tend to be located in the same end of the FM band that the FM modulators operate in, so you can see why they would feel put out: Satellite radio is stealing their listeners and kicking them in the shins. Siphoning off listeners is just business, but keying on the same stations (even if it's not intentional) is worth complaining about.
You can't blame someone for complaining about another party unjustly interfering with their business. You can't "just focus on broadcasting" if you're being jammed.
I am not a crackpot.
So many of my hippie friends think NPR is the "anti government" radio but this act by NPR to try to bring XM down in interest of their (NPR's) profit just demonstrates that NPR is as evil as the rest of corporate radio and will jump into bed with government to reduce our freedoms.
Perhaps not your rights online, but it is affecting your rights.
1. The FCC is involved. This is an agency that has some questionable pracitices and policies. Its primary purpose is to regulate the airwaves on the interest and behalf of the public. In this case the FCC can make or break a decision to give the public more choice in how it recieves its news and entertainment. This is a matter of your money (if you buy ANYTHING from the US or anything carring an FCC cert you have in some way paid taxes some of which went to the FCC) being used to control your airwaves and your choice for content delivered on those frequencies.
2. Current media oligolopy. The traditional broadcasters (ie ClearChannel) are trying to maintain their hold over the radio market. I expect this kind of behavior from such agencies but NPR, though a private organization, has traditionally worked hard for the public. I suspect that NPR is invovled here because NPR isn't being broadcast on XM/Sirius because they can't pay or won't make enough revenue for the satellite providers. I personally find that not broadcasting public radio/tv is socially irresponsible, but it is well within their rights as a private corporation.
3. NPR has an important role to play here. NPR is the friendly bully for all public interest and community radio. A lot of community/low power radio efforts can be assisted by the rules and regs that help the bigger public broadcasters like NPR and PBS. The social climate in the US is not currently favorable for public broadcasting. I would hope that in the long run people and corporations will realize that this is important and use their voices and dollars to support it. We need to put some other pressure on media rebroadcasters (cable compaines, satellite radio companies, regular broadcasters) to continue to push public interest programs and support the little guy, not because the law says they do, but because its what they ought to do.
Of course it's not just satellite radio it's ipods too. Since NPR stations are about the only thing worth listening to locally (and WFMU is on 91.1 too, for NY/NJ people) it's frustrating having the crap that people listen to on their ipods interrupt me.
NPR also helped kill off low power fm. I haven't been able to listen to them since.
NPR are shills. They produce some fine programming, but their interests are as viral as anybody elses.
Quack, quack.
Yes, even Howard Stern's own site says he's on Sirius.
And wiki says it too.
The posting is wrong.
I like some bluegrass, but I wish WAMU would break it up a bit with some thing else. I do like the old time radio programs on Sunday evening (or perhaps it's just the end of the twanging).
Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
can be found on most XM channels, but NO POLITICAL COMMERCIALS
Takes the cake for me
*DrugCheese rants*
Cool! Are you a fan of Lisa Kay Howard, by any chance?
NPR blames blocked signal for low audience.
Let me be the first to laugh.
And add Album 88 (88.5 in Atlanta - Georgia State) and WAMU 88.5 (News and Public Affairs in DC) to the list of stations that don't fit the mold.
Great post.
Nope, I haven't heard of her.
NPR has two channels on Sirius and I listen to them all the time during the morning commute.
I'm really curious to see why NPR has such an issue with satellite. Finding and reporting on issues is one thing, but to file FCC complaints? That's like ABC Nightly News investigating some cable or satellite provider and instead of just reporting their findings, they file FCC/legal proceedings against the provider.
Just support GNURadio and spread spectrum technologies. Proprietization of the spectrum will go obsolete.
e ss.html
Read up:
http://www.econlib.org/LIBRARY/Columns/Klingwirel
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
Um, NPR is broadcast on Sirius.
However, in all fairness I doubt Sirius broadcasts any sort of fundraising.
At the same time, I would imagine NPR/Sirius came to some sort of monetary agreement.
I really have to think this has more to do with XM infringing on the lower FM frequencies that are commonly used by NPR.
NPR is involved because (for reasons I don't understand) NPR stations cluster at the low end of the dial, where this XM interference problem is occuring. I get interference with my reception of 88.1, WYPR, at least weekly now from these unlawful XM portable transceivers.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Because you obviously didn't read the article. NPR is upset at the makers of satellite (and other) FM modulators. The modulators are overpowered and do not comply with FCC regulations. The manufacturers of the units have admitted this and just went on their merry way. So NPR is asking the FCC to hold these manufacturers to the regulations.
This is perfectly reasonable. Think of it this way. If Linksys sells a router with increased coverage area (because they exceed the power limits imposed by the FCC), and your neighbor buys one which causes your router to stop working, don't you think Linksys should have to comply with the law?
-dave
/., where "Apple and Google provide Iran with nukes" will be refuted with "But Microsoft is a convicted monopolist"
Everyone seems to be complaining about the quality of NPR. Honestly, I don't listen to the radio much since I got my iPods, but when I do, it's ALWAYS NPR. It's good stuff. And this is coming from someone who's 16 years old.
I would hope no one listens to NPR for investigative reporting, since they're one of the most biased news sources you can get. NPR relies to a heavy extent on listener support (if they want to keep their massive federal budget, they have to appease the voters to a degree), so they HAVE to produce content that their listeners want to hear. Because of this, they long-ago entered into a group-think spiral where the only thing you'll hear on NPR is what the people who'll pay to support NPR want to hear.
All you get on NPR is left-wing propaganda. It's not worth listening to, and it's sad how much tax money gets wasted on NPR.
If you want an unbiased source, you have to go to a source where they won't lose a massive amount of money for saying something unpopular. This makes the "new media" of the Internet the logical choice - only when reporters have very little to lose by saying something unpopular will they actually say it.
"suspect that NPR is invovled here because NPR isn't being broadcast on XM/Sirius because they can't pay or won't make enough revenue for the satellite providers."
Both Sirius and XM carry NPR programming. And both XM/Sirius pay NPR to carry NPR's programming. Why would NPR pay satellite companies to have their programming played? That doesn't make sense.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
Howard Stern = Sirius satellite radio, not XM. It's odd the summary above mentions content on one network, but the name of the other network.
... Maybe BS, maybe not. It's probably more of a case that some of the transmitters are more powerful than licensed and should be fixed.
The FCC was originally designed to regulate the radio waves... the transmission powers, the location of transmitters, ensuring different users didn't interfere with each other. That's the bulk of the complaints mentioned in the article.
The FCC has evolved into the decency police regulating what content can and can not be heard on free mediums. Those aren't the type of complaints currently being investigated because they have no authority over the satellite for-pay content.
The terrestrial radio business wants the FCC to regulate content on pay radio because pay-radio is currently better than free radio. They know that. They don't want to have to compete with the satellite guys who aren't under the same content restrictions as they are. So they're doing everything in their power to convince the FCC to try and regulate satellite content.
Things they're saying to achieve that:
1) Sirius gave a 2-day free preview over the internet. Therefore they're free and should be regulated! Obvious BS since the FCC doesn't regulate content on the internet.
2) The FM transmitters in cars that receive the radio signal and broadcast it to the car's radio are too powerful and other people can hear those transmissions.
I've had both. Sirius rocks. XM is decent. They're both better than normal radio.
I used to travel on the Mass Pike (I-90) highway on a regular basis, and would usually try to listen to the NPR stations on each ride. I say "try to listen" because every few minutes, the program would get cut by some nearby car using an FM loop to listen to their iPod or satellite radio units. It seems many of the simple FM loop devices use several of the common low-band channel spots which NPR stations prefer. The private unlicensed FM loopbacks would override the NPR licensed FM for a half mile, which means six-second bursts for opposing traffic, or 45-second periods of aggravation if I'm tracking with the FM-polluting idiot.
Someone suggested counter-warfare: I override THEIR FM with an even stronger burst that explains the problem. I don't feel that fighting fire with fire is going to help here.
[
As someone who isn't a big fan of Bluegrass, Sunday is pretty much dead to me with WAMU. I do like the Big Broadcast when I remember to tune it in though. Saturday is pretty good until the afternoon though. This American Life is just too sappy for me. The weekdays are where it's at with WAMU though, they pride themselves on their talk radio and news. Diane and Kojo both put on good shows, it's just a shame that I only catch them in the evening repeats when I can't call in and tell one of the guests why he's an idiot.
I read the internet for the articles.
Hey! I donated a good chunk of money this time around because of the bluegrass music they play.
Agreed. Nothing like a little fine mandolin and beautifully sung harmonies. Bluegrass rules.
WAMU plays bluegrass but it's really really bad bluegrass. Meanwhile they won't put something good on like Sound and Spirit because there is no airtime left. WETA is so much better in pretty much every way. If they would dump Tavis / shorten Traditions and fit in S&S and the Thistle and Shamrock they would be pretty much the best PBS radio anywhere.
NPRs complaint about the FM modulators has little to do with XM or Sirius; neither company makes nor operates the modulators, and I'm sure any that they sell have FCC approval. So if NPR has a problem with the modulators, it's either with people using unapproved or modified ones (seems unlikely), that the FCC hasn't been doing their jobs testing them (slightly more likely), that the manufacturing tolerances are terrible (much more likely), or that NPRs testing methodology of measuring unknown devices an unknown distance away in traffic isn't what you'd call rigorous (ding ding ding ding).
Local news covered by local folks (unlike the local daily paper, which is owned by Gannett), [...]
It's funny that you mention that. When modern-ish radio was first becoming commercialized, the belief was that programming had to be "local local local!" in order to generate any viewership - that radio had to talk about the most local minutinae in order to draw attention.
The idea of nationally syndicated programming, music, etc. that left the "local local local!" paradigm was considered a revolution of sorts; now limiting the geographic appeal is the "it" thing.
Really, I could care less - I have my rock station, and it plays music that changes every once in a while without me having to pay them anything. Works welle enough for me.
DATABASE WOW WOW
I love the mechanics of capitalism, but this is not the right form of competition. Companies' should win out because they improve their product or make it cheaper, not by getting the government to handicap the superior product.
I can't find mention of it anywhere, but has NPR acknowledged that they have a stake in the XM vs Sirius race? The national NPR feed is only available on Sirius.
Jerm
Oh, you're not a real doctor, are you?
Slashdotters probably listen only to internet radio, these days...
-- Let's go Viridian.
Bye bye XM.
[%] Cingular Ringtones
Let's just say she's a close personal friend... oh heck, who am I kidding -- she's my sister.
"Satellite radio is stealing their listeners"
Does anyone on Slashdot really have any idea what the words/concepts of "theft" and "stealing" mean anymore?
"Siphoning off listeners is just business...."
Didn't you just say it was stealing?
Where were you when the voynix came?
The original news articles were not about XM's land bast transmittes but all the FM modulators and short range transmitters people are putting on XM boxes.. This second article doesnt have much content, just that NPR is upset.
NPR does not broadcast fundraising; for that matter, NPR does not broadcast. They produce programming which they sell, mostly to their members: local public radio stations who raise money by fundraising. I don't know why I'm pointing out this distinction between the various entities involved, except to say it's not surprising that NPR is willing to sell it's content to Sirius, who can get the money by just charging for service. Nor is it surprising that NPR is going to bat for the scores of their member/customers who are little-guy local broadcasters getting illegally jammed by satelite radio; who is unlikely to care until someone with a decently funded legal team makes them.
Huh? Any online news media I've encountered gets money through advertisements and subscriptions. Slash, Ars Technica and Fark all have subscription models. Everyone else has ad-supported models.
(In case you didn't make the connection, if fewer people look at your website, fewer people still will click on your ads, leaving you with even more of a pittance of revenue.)
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
Hey fucktard, NPR didn't "report" this. They use it to to kill a competitor, just as the fucktards as NPR try to kill microradio too.
They do this so their is no competition to their official nice polite republican talking points.
Not sure if you have a clue about non-profits but their officers and management make profit vio their pay checks and that is stimulated by listeners who convince other corporation to invest/donate on the org.
To me, a Sirius subscriber, the most interesting part is the NAB and NPR's complaint about the shenangans XM is apparently playing with its re-transmission towers. From the article:
This clearly explains to me why XM seems to have much more sucess than Sirius in not dropping signals under overpasses, tunnels, trees etc. IMHO this filing is actually going to help Sirius a lot more than the NAB or NPR.
Maybe it's because I have the lowest-end XM unit, but my damn FM modulator has a hard time making a signal that can successfully get from my dashboard to my radio.
I don't have an anger problem, I have an idiot problem
Is it a valid law? ANd NOW you are siding with Bush's evil FCC!? Anyone who has a clue knows that satellite radio is threatening terrestrial radio. Not to mention the recent news coverage reports NPR is struggling financially because it cant win over enough listeners. Sometimes its about seeing the forest for the tress, and not about investigating small dark cavities filled with feces.
Hey douchebag, how much tax money is spent on NPR?
How much is spent on getting Bin Laden?
It is using public funds (which taxpayers are forced to pay) to file frivolous complaints to harass competitors. Just another reason the taxpayer subsidy to NPR should be eliminated.
Where were you when the voynix came?
Where I listen there's 90.3 and 90.5, and in the Berkshire Hills I believe WAMQ is in the 100s.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Suit yourself--people do all kinds of irrational things based on emotion and faulty logic.
NAB complained about the repeaters (power levels, licensed, etc). NPR is complaining about the power levels in FM modulators used to play through car stereos.
There's been an ongoing feud between NPR and Edwards ever since they canned him and he took his show to XM.... As far as repeaters go, where I live I never get more than one (of 3) bars of signal strength from the satelite. I rely on the terrestial repeaters to get any signal at all. I never use the built in fm-transmitter (I have a myfi) but I don't think there is a way to turn it off either (unless it knows to when you hook up to something else). I don't know if it affects other FM channels, I doubt I've used my regular FM radio in years now.
"Waste not one watt!" - CZ
Howard Stern is not on XM.
NPR has three stations on Sirius, so why are they going after them?
The article states that many of the violations measured by NPR are probably MP3 players with FM transmitters.
Is there anything concrete to this at all, or is this just an outdated medium trying to get the government to kill the compitition (i.e. anything that allows people to choose their own music)? The best thing about satellite radio to me is the selection I can get from it over the internet, and they do a much better job of that than most other internet radio streams I've tried. The actual radio part is nice on my commute, but I don't really care about it.
Except this one is quite rational, and the logic is sound (NPR is indeed using its taxpayer money to harass competitors). Same your complaint for a place where it actually applies.
Where were you when the voynix came?
I've got a solution to propose: why doesn't the FCC just designate a "national ultra-low-power frequency"? It seems like we need one; everyone has their iPods and XM Radios and other things that they want to play into their car stereo, and it's a real PITA to find an open channel. Plus, if you drive more than 50 miles, you have to retune it, because the "open frequency" in NYC is in use in Philly.
We need to take a single, or maybe a handful, of FM frequencies (probably at the low end of the band) and designate them for low-power portable operations -- usable only by transmitters below 200mW (or whatever the cutoff is for unlicensed FM transmitters now).
That would simplify people's lives who use portable audio equipment, because they wouldn't have to hunt for unused frequencies, and it would also make electronics designers lives easier (you'd just need a selector switch to choose between a few of the low-power-designated channels, or maybe not even that), and it would keep the unlicensed broadcasts from interfering with existing fixed service. It would pretty much be good for everybody.
It seems like this is just common sense; these sort of micro-FM-transmitters aren't going to go away anytime soon; in fact there are more of them being made every day. So the interference problem is only going to get worse if we don't do something.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
"In its second claim, the NAB contends that XM and Sirius shouldn't be allowed to give away their products for free to new car buyers or online."
I love that part. Oh Lord, PLEASE don't let them GIVE away the product.
Seriously though, I'm sure there is some "legitimate" reason why they don't want them to give it away, but it just sounds funny to hear it like that.
This space intentionally left blank.
"The traditional broadcasters (i.e. ClearChannel) are trying to maintain their hold over the radio market."
And a tiny hold it is: they have 8% or so of radio stations.
Where were you when the voynix came?
There's nothing wrong with what you're doing. Unfortunately, your setup is not an option for a whole lot of people, who have cars manufactured in the large span of time where cassette decks weren't included, and neither were direct line-inputs for MP3 players. This basically covers a whole lot of mid-90s to present cars.
When I was looking for a car, I bought an older model year specifically because it had a cassette deck in its factory head unit (in addition to a CD) while the new model had dropped the cassette. I don't own any tapes anymore, but it's a good way to interface audio components into the system without doing any modifications to the vehicle.
FM radio modulators are going to be a part of life for the foreseeable future; people aren't going to go out and buy new cars or replace their head units with ones that have line-in jacks, to listen to their MP3 player. A radio transmitter is the quick-and-dirty, and therefore popular, solution.
As I've said elsewhere, if there was a designated low-power frequency for these things, then there wouldn't be an "arms race" of people trying to illegally ratchet up their transmitter power in order to use it on top of fixed (licensed) stations. You still might get interference between one person's car and another, but that's not nearly as big an issue as fixed/mobile interference, or people getting powerful transmitters because they don't want to have to hassle with changing the frequency when they drive around, or having distant fixed stations break through or fuzz their signal.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
NPR is using taxpayer money to broadcast under legally licensed channels. XM is violating those channels illegally, ruining them for listeners. NPR is trying to prevent them from doing this. How is this harassment again?
Actually no, because your linksys router is also subject to a license agreement that says it must accept interference from other devices.
Even if I WERE tempted to buy an XM radio (my new car is "XM ready", which means I can spend a bundle to purchase the adaptor), which I'm not, the mere presence of people like Howard Stern would be enough to dissuade me.
Essentially this is a fight between media giants, and as is typical of the "free market", it's a fight over the rules that define the market.
The FCC can easily force stations to relocate; they just refuse to renew an operating license on a particular frequency.
I'm not going to go through the entire FM band, but based on my first few tries, there are a number of frequencies that only have a few stations operating on them nationwide.
87.9 MHz, for instance, is only used (according to radio-locator.com) by two licensed stations: KAWZ in Nevada and KSFH in Mountain View, CA. The latter is a high school. Running a Google search turns up a few more stations (one pirate station in San Francisco, apparently), and WBAR from Barnard College. I don't think it would be a major national sacrifice to move them to some other channel in their respective broadcasting areas. So that would be the likely candidate for a national standard low-power frequency.
Most of the other frequencies in the FM band have less than 200 stations on them in the U.S. and Canada combined; some down around 100 and some as high as 200+. While moving 100 or 150 stations wouldn't be trivial, if it was done over a period of a few years it wouldn't be terrible either. I don't think it's nearly as impossible a feat as you're making it out to be, and it's something that we need to do in order to mitigate interference and prevent a bigger problem in the future as more of these FM transmitters become available, and integrated into more portable devices.
The major issue would just be getting the FCC to do anything, since it's basically bought and owned by the major broadcasting companies and organizations.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Except theirs is quite rational, and the logic is sound (NPR is indeed filing a complaint with the FCC due to clearly defined broadcast violations, the same ones that they, NPR, must also abide by as a licensed broadcaster)
They wouldn't file against themselves, so naturally it would be a competitor, if you would even want to call it that.
Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!
Uhm. I'm not sure I quite understand most of what's going on ("what is that might 'frog with wings'") and you seem to be jumping around conclusions, inserting them where they don't belong and otherwise shifting mid-thought. If you're trying to emulate the difficulty of driving down the street with your radio content shifting every other block, congratulations, excellent joke. If you're being serious, and if I understand your argument, I'd like to point some things out.
Most Ipod-to-car type devices, and cell-phones-over-the-radio and anything like that, usually come with preset stations that most won't change. I stopped using mine when I realized it took too long to set up, I couldn't drive in any high traffic area without hitting interference from other cars and using a different station would only be effective for a block or so before I'd run into some radio station that only comes in when I hit certain spots of town. These are the problems they encounter. Whether you have them or not, enough of us can verify this claim.
NPR's funding for the project can be arguably reasoned as an effort to ensure that listeners are getting a quality experience. Either you're arguing as one of two "funders". First, you might be arguing as an NPR pledger, at which point I would say that that receiving programming is just as, if not more, important as producing the content and it's short-sighted to argue that just because you've not yet encountered signal shift than there is no problem and other users affected can cram their problem into their butt because you're not paying for their service. It's also like arguing "I don't want my pledge money going to pay for employee sick days" or "if any of my money is spent on staplers, I will never pledge again." There are any number of incidentals involved in providing your favorite show. Money pledged during more popular shows helps fund less popular shows, some money goes into paying for employee benefits, someone has to pay for studio time.
Or perhaps you're arguing as a tax-payer, and your argument is that your tax dollars shouldn't be funding their research. Your complaint is noted, but it's as... argh... what's the word? Useless? Moot? No, those are too harsh. Basically, your argument that you don't want to fund their research about signal strength bears the same weight as you writing a letter to the US Army saying "focus more on developing freeze guns because those are nicer" or "please ensure that my tax dollars are spent on tanks rather than airplanes." If it makes you feel better to believe that the small percentage of your taxes going to the NPR people is only spent on programming, that's fine because they can use all of mine for their research, but that's just ignorance of finance. Using that logic, you can probably assume that every single dollar of your taxes went to pay for that one person on assistance living down the block from you and they're practically your dependent since they're paid entirely by your tax funds. Most of us realize that our money is basically thrown into a slushfund, and then doled out. Some of this pays for services I agree with (programs and institutions I like) and some goes for services I disagree with (funding the Iraq war.) I can complain, and vote for politicians that promise to slash funding for that program later, but overall I realize that there's someone else out there who probably wants ALL their taxes to go for the things I want none of mine going to.
If anything, their name check of MP3s is the opposite of "Napster doom and gloom" since they are not saying that MP3s are causing the problem MP3 players should be regulated. In fact, their support of podcasting disputes that argument. You would have a better argument dropping the "evil MP3's" slant and talking about how NPR is singling out the XM and other satellite players as an evil when there are other culprits mentioned almost as an aside (note, I have not yet read the article, I'm going on the fact that the submission almost entirely focuses on th
"one only has to listen to 20 seconds of Howard Stern's language to know that the lack of regulation gives satellite radio a distinct advantage"
-------------------
It clearly depends on how you define "advantage".
Me thinks the language matches the content.
I can't wait to hear the Ira Glass special on the overweight hookers farting contest.
Oh wait, that would be on NOVA, wouldn't it??
.
If Howard Stern's language is a "distinct advantage" someone needs a brain transplant.
Very cool. I usually only listen in the morning and afternoon (while I'm grocery shopping or tailgating, go Skins), thats why I haven't heard of her.
As a matter of fact, I do as I work for one and have for many years. Not-for-profit means that they're not publicly owned or traded. Therefore whatever 'profit' (which is really just the surplus after expenses) that is made gets reinvested in the company mostly for improving services or upgrading infrastructure.
This is markedly different from publicly held broadcasting companies who have obligations to their boards, shareholders, and corporate sponsers. So who would I rather get my news from? A private organization or a bunch of corporate shills with a political axe to grind? I'm not naive enough to believe that any news source is completely unbiased but NPR is about as close as you can get, especially in this country. BTW - This is coming from a political and fiscal conservative and I'm not the only one. I know a lot of people on both sides of the aisle that listen to NPR. So it's not just for tree-huggers and hippies anymore.
And would you please explain to me how NPR is working with government to reduce our freedoms again? Seriously, WTF?
What if the Hokey Pokey really is what it's all about?
I was directing a college station in 1979-80 when they kicked us all out of the 10-watt program and bumped us up to >+100, guess they moved power but kept the bands where they were.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Hey douchebag, how much tax money is spent on NPR?
Too much.
How much is spent on getting Bin Laden?
Not enough.
If NPR wants to beg for money from listeners, it should have to compete in the open market. I shouldn't be forced to support them, at any amount.
But the point is that the manufacturers are not abiding by the license agreement. So if they decide to violate the maximum power requirement, what makes you think that they follow the other requirements?
-dave
/., where "Apple and Google provide Iran with nukes" will be refuted with "But Microsoft is a convicted monopolist"
"In the ongoing radio wars, one only has to listen to 20 seconds of Howard Stern's language to know that the lack of regulation gives satellite radio a distinct advantage.
Um, I just can't seem to figure out how Howard Stern's langauge give anyone an advantage. Wait! just as I was typing I realized what the advantage was... lack of intelligent discussion. I forgot all you kids grew up as the MTV generation.
Idiot. It's just because NPR is generally on the lower uncrowded side of the spectrum. Couple this with the fact that FM retransmitters use that area too. Now imagine that the tiny amount of power that the FCC allowed to these retransmitters was increased by a factor of 5. Forty or fifty feet and a crystal clear signal, instead of right next to the antenna as intended. NPR isn't the only one getting trampled by XMs desire to integrate with the FM band...many other stations are too.
XM is entirely in the fault here, by not adhering to FCC regulations regarding power levels. NPR is just an interested party.
Linux: Free if your time is worthless.
NPR reminds me where there's money there are underhanded business tactics.
Quack, quack.
If 'radio is dead' where are you going to get...
I've found that podcasts have changed how I listen to the "radio" immensely.
Ironically, it was NPR's podcasts that really did it; I never was particularly interested in the amateur ones, although maybe I just never found the right things to listen to. But I now have iTunes subscribed to "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me" and the "Most E-Mailed Stories"; the former is weekly and the latter daily updates. (If only they had Car Talk available via iTunes as a free automatic Podcast, my life would be complete...) Every morning I just grab my iPod on the way out the door, plug it into my car's audio system, and hit play. It's like radio, but it's on my schedule. If I don't want to listen to the news that morning, I can throw on something lighter, or just listen to music. If I need to make or take a phone call, I can pause it and come back later.
A few years ago, I would have agreed with you that radio was essential; I use my car's CD player only occasionally, and listened to radio constantly. However, I could easily see podcasts replacing radio; it's the broadcast-TV equivalent of a TiVo. Everybody gets exactly the programming they want, on their schedule.
All the mediums that work on radio -- comedy, news (admittedly not in real time), music, variety shows -- all work in podcasts. As soon as people can get the licensing and copyright problems worked out, I think there's a market for music podcasts produced by DJs. As people acquire larger and larger music libraries, having playlists picked out and being exposed to new music becomes more important and valued. I think there's room for DJs to actually be creative again, instead of just being robotic talking heads; they have to be creative, and find ways to add value, because if people just want to listen to music they don't have to listen to a DJ anymore.
I see XM and Sirius as transitional formats. They're subscription-based, but they don't let you really pick what you're subscribing to. Subscriber-supported podcasts, on the other hand, would give people who are interested in content what they want, without having to pay for stuff they don't. And it doesn't even have to rely on advertising to work. I think the market is only going to grow; eventually the portable MP3 player will itself become redundant, and people's car stereos will just download the tracks automatically using WiFi or cellular connections. It's not that farfetched; the technology to do it today exists, it's mostly the cost and complexity that's keeping it away from most people.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Therefore the satellite providers are not "competitors".
I think the taxpayer subsidy for the military should also be eliminated so that I don't have to pay for frivolous wars I disagree with. If someone wants to beat down some other country, they should hire one of the many available commercial outfits to do it. The Defense Department is unfairly interfering with the free market for mercenary services.
Still hoping for Gentle Treatment...
> If NPR wants to beg for money from listeners, it should have to compete in the open market. I shouldn't be forced to support them, at any amount.
Hmm, I'd think you would want all projects to work like public radio stations: they merely get seed money from the government, then have to augment that with voluntary contributions from listeners. That ends up taking around two weeks a year for my local station.
So, what you get from public radio:
- some of the most respected and professional journalism available in the US
- some of the most creative music across all genres available in the US
- high quality programming (Praerie Home Companion, This American Life, Wait Wait Don't Tell Me, etc)
- local news
And what does it cost you? probably a few pennies a year in gov taxes plus whatever you care to donate.
Now, imagine if the military or some other truly huge government activities were funded this way! Don't like our boondogle in Iraq? Great, not only can you hopefully vote the bums out, but you can also withhold revenue. Having spent years in the military I can tell you that it is much less professionally run than my local *public* radio station!
Howard Stern. Since Howard joined Sirius, it is growing subscribers faster than XM is.
Also, XM is airing some its "exclusive" shows like Opie and Anthony on terrestrial radio now, albeit slightly censored. How do you think XM subscribers feel about having to pay for content that's now free somewhere else?
So you want to zero out the 2% of their funding that comes from government grants. Sounds OK. I assume you also want to zero the government grants that go to commercial radio stations?
Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
"So you want to zero out the 2% of their funding that comes from government grants. Sounds OK. I assume you also want to zero the government grants that go to commercial radio stations?"
Yes.... Why would you ask?
Where were you when the voynix came?
My Sirius Reciever on FM Transmit can BARELY broadcast powerful enough to recieve it clear in my OWN car on low band frequencies. I think the FM transmitter problem is solely an issue with XM.
"profit just demonstrates that NPR is as evil as the rest of corporate radio "
Looks like from your wording that you also realize that NPR is a corporation.
"will jump into bed with government to reduce our freedoms."
They are already in bed with government: government forces the average taxpayer to give money to NPR.
Where were you when the voynix came?
Great Salon article explains this and why the current FCC system is antiquated.
2 /spectrum/index.html
http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2003/03/1
Report to the CIA that you think your PC is being hacked by Al Qaida terrorists. Report to the FCC that your business's legal radio transmissions are being interfered with. See who responds first!
"A little misunderstanding? Galileo and the Pope had a little misunderstanding."
These translators are a secondary service. i.e. they got there AFTER the licensed NPR or whatever religious, Canadian or Mexican stations preoccupy the channels. Legally and morally, it is up to the translators to stay clear of the services that are already there. This is EXACTLY the sort of thing that the FCC is supposed to handle, and NPR and other broadcasters who are being interfered with are well within their rights to complain. It is exactly the same situation as if your neighbor's wireless router were defective or poorly designed and was laying down a strong interfering signal on top of your favorite TV station.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
I wish I had the guts to post misdirected, uninformed rage with enough courage to attach my name to it.
There, fixed it.
Attention deficit disorder is a complicated issue, spanning several major... HEY LET'S GO RIDE BIKES!
If NPR wants to beg for money from listeners, it should have to compete in the open market. I shouldn't be forced to support them, at any amount.
Imagine a US and A with an a la carte tax and deficit spending system... we wouldn't have to pay for any more international military adventurism, tax credits to corporations, bridges to nowhere, haut congressman-on-page action, and No Bid contracts with Haliburton or the Carlyle Group.
Speak truth to power.
"we wouldn't have to pay for .... tax credits to corporations"
We already spend $0 on that. A tax break or tax credit is never a transfer of money from the the government to someone. It is merely allowing someone to keep more of what they earned or owned in the first place. Nothing spent by the government, so no taxpayer funds ventured.
"we wouldn't have to pay for any more international military adventurism"
You bet! Instead, we'll have international military adventures right here, and we won't have to spend a dime on them.
Where were you when the voynix came?
What seems really strange to me is that MY Sirius, when I was using the FM modulator, was usually overpowered my even weak stations, so I don't think that I was interfering with anyone else. The FM modulators outputs are scattered all over the FM band, as are many lower powered radio stations, and the only reception complaints are from NPR listeners????? Sounds funny to me!!? And the Satellite Terrestrial repeaters operate the the 2.XXX GHz microwave range close to the satellite transmitters frequency.
I am very curious to find out how this is done. We have a repeater attached to our apartment and find it quite annoying and sometimes a little scary. A satellite dish is attached to one corner of the outside wall of our apartment. There are two "thin cables" that run to a repeater. Then another set of much thicker cables run from the repeater around our apartment wall just barely above each of our back bedrooms window (you can see the stupid things standing up and looking out the window) to a 5-10 foot pole antenna.
What truly scares me is the fact that most of the insulation has fallen off of both the receiving and especially the transmitting cables. I don't know if it's related but we can't get a good wireless signal 5 feet from most WAPs we have purchased over the years.
Should I be concerned that they have such powerful cables transmitting literally 3 feet from where I sleep?
While the FM spectrum below 92 MHz is reserved for non-profit and community broadcasters (and relatively low-power transmitters), there is no requirement that non-profits are restricted to that part of the spectrum.
In the NYC market there is a non-profit station (WBAI) right in the middle of the dial at 99.5. They are running a 50kW transmitter from the top of the Empire State building, which makes for one of the strongest signals on the dial...
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
Why bother to innovate.
Quack, quack.
I actually volunteered there for a while on 7 Second Delay, with Ken and Andy.
WFMU kept me alive with Punk/Hardcore in the early 1980's when you couldn't find anywhere else to listen to music.
It's one of the few stations that DJ's can have Mr. Sinatra, followed by the Bad Brains, and then some MC Soleil (a French rapper), and actually have the music flow sound good.
I've always felt that WFMU was the station to listen to, if you REALLY liked music.
Now I listen to it over the internet in Los Angeles.
..........FULL STOP.
I can't believe the number of stupid, ignorant, uninformed posts over this article. However kewl you think XM or Sirius is, or if you think NPR has an axe to grind with satellite radio, or if broadcast radio is antiquated, if XM or Sirius are breaking the law - THEY'RE BREAKING THE LAW. Federal regulations are there for a reason. Laws aren't made for companies to ignore if they have a popular product. If you disagree, please be ready to extend this privlege to oil, energy, and manufacturing companies who would be more than happy to stop complying with costly environmental regulations.
It's just amazing how Slashdot can take such an obviously slanted article and add to it, with the Slashdot hoi polloi following along like a bunch of lemmings.
Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
No, they claim it's satellite but admit they have no way of knowing if it's satellite or the iPod (or any other media player) based transmitters. Again I ask, why is NPR going after satellite in particular?
If it's only 'pennies a year' then NPR should do fine without it.
Why do they become so shrill when the very notion is raised?
I've moved geographic regions to a location where I can still pick up my old NPR affiliate, but barely. There's this stretch of highway that I always seem to pick up Howard Stern on when driving into work in the morning though. I wondered why that was happening.
As a Sirius subscriber, I want MORE repeaters and strong FM transmitters. I subscribe because I don't like commercials and I don't like censorship.
Fuck the FCC.
"... if you buy from a smart car manufacturer, like Toyota, you can get an auxiliary input jack in even the cheapest car. I know as I own a 2007 Toyota Yaris and I regularly enjoy plugging into the car stereo through the aux-in connector in the console between the front seats."
:-)
Did it ever occur to you that not everyone has bought a car in the past two years? Toyota didn't start putting those jacks in all their cars until very recently. It's certainly not in my 2000 Camary. So I guess, by your logic, all manufactuers are not smart. I find this especially funny, given you have a 2007 Yaris, when today's date is November 2006.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
I sort of place music on-demand in the same category as speech-recognition and text-to-speech for text messaging. It might work and be cool, but it's easier to just call the person.
People who think they know everything really piss off those of us that actually do.
From a much better article at http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-
The businessweek article (much like this summary) is crap. The only complaint that NPR filed was about power levels in FM modulators. And their complaint is about all FM modulators, not just the satellite radio modulators.
From the Baltimore Sun article:
And:
In fact, the issue is so important that the Consumer Electronics Association, which represents the makers of FM modulators says:
So again, NPR is not going after satellite in particular. The NAB is going after satellite for additional, purely business (and in my opinion, invalid) reasons, but have no relation to NPRs efforts regarding modulator power levels. Furthermore, the satellite radio companies admit that their products violate FCC rules.
-dave
/., where "Apple and Google provide Iran with nukes" will be refuted with "But Microsoft is a convicted monopolist"
and You can't be too bright to not listen to any of the 148 channels he's not on.
Even for those of us that demand lossless, Multi-Terri byte is generally unneeded. Lets do the math.
700 MB - Largest CD Size.
1,000 CDs - A very large CD Collection.
----------
700,000 MB - Not even a Terabyte for a very large CD collection
Even as uncompressed wave files, one external 750GB drive is more than most people will ever need. My 400+ CD collection ripped to FLAC in less than 200GB. I expect that over the next week or two, I will run the whole thing through a transcoder and keep a copy of each song in MP3 as well. It will make it easier for my wife to use as her pap only uses MP3, and given that the whole collection takes less than 200GB of the 750GB, I still won't come close to filling the drive.
"some of the most respected and professional journalism available in the US"
Respected by those who agree with them, yes. Vilified by those who don't. The "Journalists" of Foxed News are probably even more respected by more people. Why not then force taxpayers to subsidize Fox News as well?
"And what does it cost you? probably a few pennies a year in gov taxes plus whatever you care to donate."
If the forced money is so small, then they can do without it, right?
"some of the most creative music across all genres available in the US"
The majority of which is CLASSICAL music. Which was creative and innovative...a couple of hundred years ago.
Where were you when the voynix came?
"A recent test found that 19 of these transmitters were unlicensed and another 221 exceeded their authorized power level, giving NPR an opening to press with an apparently sympathetic FCC."
NPR programming is carried by XM's competitor, Sirius (the same guys who also carry Howard Stern).
At any rate, I don't understand why NPR (or, more specifically, NPR member stations) would have an axe to grind against satellite radio, since the only real advantage satellite has over public radio is not having to change stations when you're on a road trip. I find myself wondering if NPR stations have had their listenership drop in the same way as commercial radio, so maybe we should look into that before we start declaring an NPR anti-technology bias.
Yes, I'm well aware of that.
Which is not to say that the fact that I could buy a 2001 Subaru in April of 2000 isn't stupid. It keeps getting worse, too. We're fast approaching the point where the model year will be *two* years in the future. At this rate, it will be automobile makers who have a Y3K problem first.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
> Respected by those who agree with them, yes. Vilified by those who don't. The "Journalists" of Foxed News are probably even
> more respected by more people. Why not then force taxpayers to subsidize Fox News as well?
Even most conservatives I know listen to NPR. I'm sure there are some of the Rush Limbaugh type who can't stand it. But keep in mind as a liberal I think it often reflects a much more pro-administration and conservative viewpoint than I do. Those that vilify it might be angered by the fact that they do give airtime to different views. That's got to really burn them up.
> If the forced money is so small, then they can do without it, right?
Sure, punish them for being affordable while letting the military blow billions on pork-barel. That would be a great deal.
> The majority of which is CLASSICAL music. Which was creative and innovative...a couple of hundred years ago.
ah, you probably don't listen to public radio. Note that NPR != public radio, it is a set of services and syndicated programs oftened subscribed to by public radio stations. In my town I've got at least two public radio stations - one just plays classical music and is completely unaffiliated with NPR. The other is affiliated with NPR but plays no classical music. It does play local music, blues, jazz, worldbeat, bluegrass, celtic, zydeco and rock. Unlike a mainstream station it has a playlist as long as whatever the dj wants to play - instead of just 10-20 tunes.
Of course, your mileage may vary - but I've found pretty high quality of programming at all public radio stations that I've encountered so far.
On the other hand, if all you want is an extreme conservative point of view and top 10 country hits, then public radio probably isn't for you.
"Those that vilify it might be angered by the fact that they do give airtime to different views. That's got to really burn them up."
Yes, conservativies villify it for giving airtime to "different" views (different from their own) just as liberals villify conservative talk radio for giving airtime to "different" views (different from their own). The difference, however, is that only one of these outlets has people threatened with violence and/or jail time if they refuse to pay money to support it.
"Sure, punish them for being affordable while letting the military blow billions on pork-barel"
The nice fallacy of "it's OK, it's only a little waste".
"ah, you probably don't listen to public radio"
I listened to 3 hours yesterday (compared to 3 minutes of Limbaugh). The ratio and amounts will likely be the same today.
"On the other hand, if all you want is an extreme conservative point of view and top 10 country hits, then public radio probably isn't for you"
No more extreme than the liberal views on NPR...and all without people being forced to pay for it.
Where were you when the voynix came?
I misunderstood the article and was unaware that NPR was indeed rebroadcast on XM/Sirius. Thank you for correcting me, peer-review does work!
If you won't do your homework before posting, you're nothing but a fucking troll.
XM doesn't build the receivers/transmitters. They are built by many different companies. I use a transmitter in my car but it is NOT made by XM radio. Going after XM would be like going after a car company after you had a tire blow out. Yes you are using it with the car but the tire is made by Goodyear, B.F. Goodrich, etc. They should go after the company who is actually breaking the law!